| Papers [1-15] of 100 :: [Page 1 of 7] | | Go to page : 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 —> | Search results on "SOFT DRINK INDUSTRY THAILAND U": |
|
|
Soft Drink Industry in Thailand and U.K., 2004.
An in-depth evaluation of the marketing strategies of Coca-Cola and Pepsi in Thailand and the United Kingdom.
5,550 words (approx. 22.2 pages), 30 sources, MLA, $ 135.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This paper evaluates the marketing strategies of Coca-Cola and Pepsi in Thailand and the United Kingdom and recommends effective marketing strategies for each country. The paper presents the soft drink industry statistics for each country and examines the market trends over the years.
Outline
Introduction
Thailand
Coca-Cola in Thailand
Pepsi in Thailand
Suggested Marketing Strategies for Thailand
United Kingdom
Coke in the United Kingdom
Pepsi in the United Kingdom
Bottled Water Market in the UK
Recommended Marketing Strategies for the UK Market
Conclusion
From the Paper
"Coca-Cola and Pepsi, rated among the top companies in the world share a common fact ? for several years, both these companies have been successfully selling a simple product made of water and sugar to almost all countries. This would have been impossible unless the companies were able to create sustained excitement over their products and brands among the people and its employees. (Davis and Dunn, 2002) "
| |
|
The Soft Drink Industry, 2002.
A study of the soft drink industry in the United States and an indication of how it affects the U.S. economy.
3,800 words (approx. 15.2 pages), 28 sources, MLA, $ 104.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This paper is an analysis of the soft drink industry, outlining the contribution of the major brands to the U.S economy and how the industry is categorized. This paper also discusses the market structure -how it operates, and various marketing strategies of the different soft drink industries.
From the Paper
"The soft drink industry is perhaps one of the most comprehensive as it identifies with other kinds of industries. The extent and expanse of the industry is insurmountable due to the fact that it is responsible for bringing in high level of revenues and provision of economic stability in the country. Yet it is also one of the most controversial due to the competitive environment it maintains. Researches indicate the carbonated soft drink industry is not only vast but its potential to growth is also on going. However, whether the growth is phenomenal or stagnant will be analyzed in the following sections."
| |
|
The Soft Drink Market, 2004.
An examination of the soft drink market, in general, and Good Body drink, in particular, focusing on marketing successes and failures.
2,950 words (approx. 11.8 pages), 11 sources, MLA, $ 87.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This paper studies the marketing trends and strategies used by Good Body drink to market its product in the United States. An overview of the soft drink market in general is provided. The paper discusses the target market of Good Body drink and analyzes the product's marketing successes and failures. Various opportunities and threats facing the soft drink company are presented in this paper.
Introduction
Good Body Drink and its Target Market
The Drink Industry and its Current Environment
Good Body Drink?s Marketing Successes and Failures
SWOT Analysis of Good Body Drink
Opportunities and Threats to be Addressed
Conclusion
From the Paper
"Good Body drink was established in California by a group of friends who were looking for a healthy alternative drink in the early 70s. The product during its initial stages was produced in the homes of the manufacturers and marketed to local establishments and restaurants by using personal selling. The advertisements and promotions used by the company were pleasing and appealed to the sense of humor of the community they served. When pricing the product the owners of the company choose to price it higher that the other drinks available in the market. In spite of the higher price of the product the company was able to increase the sales growth. With customer demand increasing the company also decided to diversify. It created more than 25 additional unique flavors to complement the ones that were already being marketed at the time."
| |
|
The Soft Drink Industry, 2005.
This paper offers a global analysis of the soft drink industry.
3,150 words (approx. 12.6 pages), 13 sources, $ 124.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This paper explores the soft drink industry from the perspective of a consulting group hired to represent the interests of Coca-Cola. The case study presented is fictional but the data and recommendations used in the paper are based upon factual analysis of Coca-Cola's current global positioning, the positioning of the industry as a whole, as well as ongoing threats and challenges faced by the soft drink industry.
From the Paper
"Coca-Cola is only one of hundreds of participants in the global soft drink industry. For the purposes of clarity, participation in the soft drink industry is defined when a company "manufactures, distributes and markets non-alcoholic beverage concentrates and syrups, including fountain syrups" (Reuters, 2005)."
| |
|
The Evolution of the Soft Drink Industry, 2002.
Investigates the soft drink industry from it's inception to present day.
2,150 words (approx. 8.6 pages), 11 sources, $ 80.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
Details the major players and their rise to the top of this industry. Shows the importance of advertising and niche marketing which is particular to this industry. Gives examples of how soft drink companies used niche marketing to corner different sectors of the market. Reaches into the future of this industry and shows how this industry and it's responsibilities are changing.
| |
|
Snapple vs. Soft Drinks Companies, 2002.
An in-depth examination of how the soft-drink brand Snapple fits into the market and how it has found its niche.
7,894 words (approx. 31.6 pages), 60 sources, MLA, $ 170.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This analysis begins with an overview of the market in which Snapple competes and a history of the company. The first part of the plan details Snapple in relationship to its major competitors, primarily the soft-drink giants, Coke and Pepsi, both of whom are vying for the same market as Snapple. A great amount of background detail on the beverage industry is provided, with special concentration on the ways that distribution is handled, how the companies relate to the distributors and what their strategies are. This report makes great use of the annual reports for Triarc that details the growth and projections for Snapple. Original marketing ideas and projections are reanalyzed in terms of how this acquisition would affect Snapple as a company. In the assumptions section of this plan, Cadbury?s possible reactions are detailed, based on secondary evidence of that company?s past experiences. Because of the complexity of comparing specific figures and competitive positions for Snapple and all of its competitors, the plan contains a number of tables for easy reference. One table that is of particular interest is the competitive matrix in which Lipton?s, Snapple, Nestea, Arizona and SoBe are analyzed.
Some attention is also directed to the way Snapple creates new products, and brings them to market, as well as how the company disposes of its old flavors by use of a ?flavor graveyard? on the company?s website. As a part of Snapple?s strong consumerism, the plan details how customers around the world vie for the honor of creating a new flavor. All referenced material is numbered, and the sources and notes appear at the end of the plan.
Executive Summary
Background Assessment
Historical Appraisal
Market
Market activity
Sales, Costs and Gross Profits
Technology Product and Process Improvements
Market Characteristics
Government and Social
Notes and Sources
From the Paper
"Standard & Poor's Industry Classification states that the soft drink industry, the one in which Snapple competes, is a sub-segment of the larger Foods and Nonalcoholic Beverage Industry. There are five major categories in this $81.7 billion sub-segment: A) soft drinks ($55.5 billion); B) fruit beverages ($15.4 billion), C) bottled water ($5 billion); D) ready-to-drink (RTD) tea ($3.5 billion); and E) sports drinks ($2.3 billion). Within this industry, costs are broken down into two main categories: "Marketing" costs which account for a total of 80% of consumer spending and raw materials costs which account for the remaining 20%. 1 By tradition, the sub-segment allots to marketing costs, all amounts direct or indirect connected to labor, packaging, transportation, distribution, advertising and promotions. Raw material costs of agricultural commodities have been on the decline in recent years. The soft drink industry is composed primarily of franchise companies. The typical business model is for the firm to produce soft drink concentrates, and then mix those with carbonated water to produce the final beverages. Generally, the companies manufacture and sell the beverages themselves, or outsource these functions to bottlers."
| |
|
The US Soft Drink Industry, 2005.
Traces the history and growth of the American soft drink industry.
3,160 words (approx. 12.6 pages), 6 sources, MLA, $ 91.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
The American soft drink industry has had an exceptional history; few industries can match its consistent record of profitable growth. The industry is also one of continual change and evolution. The paper shows that its competitive climate requires bottlers and franchise companies to respond with speed and boldness to competitive challenges, technological developments and changing consumer tastes. The pace of the industry has quickened over the last decade, making the challenge of managing and planning for future profitable growth even more demanding.
From the Paper
"The increasing volume on different components of production costs can be quantified. Direct labor costs, for instance, are determined by the line speed, the number of lines per plant, and the types of lines. A canning line requires the least direct labor; a returnable bottling line the most. The mix of lines within a plant determines the total direct labor cost per case. To increase volume in a plant, management would first run the lines more hours per day, either by adding another shift or by adding overtime. The usual path to increasing production capacity itself is to upgrade a line to increase its output by acquiring faster components or perhaps replacing the old line with an entirely new, faster line."
| |
|
Soft Drink Marketing Study Proposal, 2004.
This article contains a proposal for marketing research in the soft drink industry.
1,800 words (approx. 7.2 pages), 2 sources, MLA, $ 63.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
In this paper, the writer presents a proposal for marketing research within the soft drink industry. The writer maintains that the proposed research would involve a broad-spectrum historical study. The writer continues that this research is intended to analyse the overall dynamics of consumer beverage preferences. The writer concludes that such research is with the objective of identifying market segments most open to further growth.
From the Paper
"Consumer preferences in soft drinks or in non-alcoholic beverages in general are highly subjective and personal. However these preferences are not purely random or arbitrary, but conditioned by cultural attitudes. This is as true in the domestic market as in international markets. Consumers vary not only in their beverage preferences, but in how they respond to beverage marketing. This is well known, but common assumptions about the overall structure of the market often go unexamined and ..."
| |
|
Soft Drinks vs. the Beer Industry, 2001.
In-depth analysis of these two industries, using Porter's Five Force Model and a SWOT analysis; focusing on the UK market.
5,380 words (approx. 21.5 pages), 25 sources, APA, $ 132.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This paper analyzes the key environmental influences on the soft drink and beer industries in the United Kingdom, using the Political, Economical, Social, Technological (PEST) Analysis. It also evaluates the competitive environment by implementing Porters? Five Forces Analysis in order to compare the industries? competitive edge both today and in the future. The second section of the paper presents a SWOT Analysis for the two key players of each industry and illustrates how they respond to the main drivers to change. Finally, the comparable future prospects are discussed in Section Three. The appendix includes an analysis of gathered data for the two industries.
Table of Contents
Introduction
Environmental Influences
I.1 Soft Drinks Industry
I.1.1 Macro Environment ? PEST Analysis
I.1.2 Competitive Environment-Porter?s 5 Forces Model
I.1.3 Attractiveness of the Soft Drinks Market
I.2 Beer Industry
I.2.1 Macro Environment ? PEST Analysis
I.2.2 Competitive Environment-Porter?s 5 Force Model
I.2.3 Attractiveness of the Beer Market
I.3 Soft Drink Versus Beer Industry-Comparison of the Attractiveness
II Response of Key Players to the Changing Environment
II.1 Soft Drinks Industry
II.1.1 SWOT Analysis of the Key Players
II.1.2 Response of Key Players to Main Drivers to Change
II.2 Beer Industry
II.2.1 SWOT Analysis of Key Players
II.2.2 Response of Key Players to Main Drivers to Change
III Comparable Future Prospects
III.1 Soft Drinks Industry
III.2 Beer Industry
Bibliography
Appendix
From the Paper
"The soft drinks market is highly concentrated into the activities of a handful of major companies, led by two dominant alliances. The clear leader is the alliance between Coca-Cola and Cadbury Schweppes, knows as Coca-Cola & Schweppes Beverages (CCSB). Due to the high costs of market entry into a large, national sector such as soft drinks, and the significant resources required to meet distribution demands, it is expected that the soft drinks industry structure will continue to become more consolidated at the top, and increasingly fragmented at entry level."
| |
|
Soft Drinks Market, 2002.
Marketing proposal for sports soft drink company Gatorade?s expansion into international markets.
1,845 words (approx. 7.4 pages), 17 sources, MLA, $ 59.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
An analysis and marketing recommendations on Gatorade?s Strategy for International Markets. The analysis and recommendations have been developed based on recent market trends. The writer explains that given Gatorade?s undisputed success in the U.S. sports drink market; there is a strong case to invest in expanding its consumer franchise in international markets. The papers shows that such expansion will allow Gatorade to build on its already existing status as the world leader in sports drink, reduce dependence on the U.S. market and lead to strong revenue and profitability increases.
From the Paper
"Gatorade?s sales, which was acquired by Quaker Oats in 1983, has grown from $100 million in 1984 to over $2 billion worldwide in 2001. The brand commands 85% share of the sports drink category in the U.S.,1 contributing 33% of total sales and growing at an annual double-digit rate, outpacing the ambling general foods industry. Realizing that 80% of its customers were in the U.S. and Canada, Gatorade turned its attention to potentially large and important global markets such as Latin America, Europe and China. 2 Gatorade was launched in Australia, Brazil, Singapore and Mexico in 1994; China, Indonesia, Columbia and the Philippines in 1995; and the Middle East and South Africa in 1996.3 However, given Quaker?s relative lack of global resources, Gatorade faces many challenges in international markets.
Objective: The objective of this paper is to evaluate the opportunities and challenges for Gatorade in key international markets and to recommend marketing solutions."
| |
|
UK Soft Drink Industry, 2002.
This paper examines market segmentation in the UK soft drink industry.
1,650 words (approx. 6.6 pages), 12 sources, $ 62.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
It outlines the development of a questionnaire for senior executives in the industry that would provide the researcher with comprehensive insight into the industry. It reviews the relevant literature and identifies theoretical and practical issues that arise.
| |
|
The Carbonated Soft Drink Market, 2005.
This paper discusses the marketing strategies of the participants in the Cola Wars: Coca-Cola, PepsiCo and Cadbury Schweppes.
5,080 words (approx. 20.3 pages), 14 sources, APA, $ 127.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This paper explains that Coca-Cola is the most dominant firm in the carbonated soft drink industry with a market share of 44%; the product lines of Coca-Cola, PepsiCo and Cadbury Schweppes are very similar and operate parallel to one another. The author points out that renaming the diet version of Sprite to Diet Sprite Zero is one of the Coca-Cola Company's more recent strategies and is a correct marketing "Flank-attack" strategy. The paper relates that Cadbury Schweppes's niche in the carbonated soft drink market is its specialization in lower priced goods compared to Pepsi and Coca-Cola products with the exception being Dr Pepper, which is priced equally to Coca-Cola and Pepsi products.
Table of Contents
The Cola Wars
Coca-Cola
General & Specific Strategy #1
Correct General & Specific Use #1
Future General & Specific Strategy #1
General Strategy #2
Correct General Strategy#2
Future General Strategy #2
Specific Strategy #2
Not-Correct Specific Strategy #2
Future Specific Strategy #2
General and Specific Strategy #3
Correct General & Specific Strategy #3
Future General and Specific Strategy #3
Expanding Market Demand and Share
Defending Market Share,
Pepsico
Specific & General Strategy #1
Correct Use Specific General Strategy #1
Future Specific and General Strategy #1
Specific & General Strategy #2
Correct Use of Specific and General Strategy #2
Future Specific and General Strategy #2
Specific Strategy #3
Correct Use of Specific Strategy#3
Future Use of Specific Strategy #3
General Strategy #3: Official Sponsor Pro Sports
Cadbury Schweppes
Specific Strategy #1, # 2, & #3
General Strategy #1 Merchandising
Correct General Strategy #1 (Specific #4)
Future General Strategy #1 (specific #4)
General Strategy #2 A&W
Not-Correct Use General Strategy #2
Not -Correct Future Use General Strategy #2
From the Paper
"Seventy-five (75)% of Americans are chronically dehydrated and in 37% of Americans, the thirst mechanism is so weak that it is often mistaken for hunger. Water is necessity for the human body, with this being said it was a good strategy for Coca-Cola to enter the water market. Coca-Cola has good distribution channels for their beverages; they should use these channels to distribute their water beverages. They should develop a brand of water which has minerals and nutrients in it to reach those health fanatics. The water market is growing at an astronomical rate compared to the cola market; it was a good idea to enter this market as Coca-Cola did. Some effective media types of advertising I would suggest include Newspapers possibly coupons, magazine ads, Television ads, radio advertisements and the Internet."
| |
|
Soft Drink Industry Internationally, 1995.
Examines the economic performance of Coca-Cola, PepsiCo and Cadbury Schweppes. Discusses revenue, competition, products, liquidity, debt, valuation and growth. Includes charts.
3,825 words (approx. 15.3 pages), 16 sources, $ 135.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
From the Paper
"Industry Overview
The soft drink industry is one of the strongest and largest industries both within the United States and abroad. Domestic growth in the industry is expected to be in the three to four percent range for both 1995 and 1996 with the international market posting strong performance, as well.
Three international companies, Coca-Cola, PepsiCo and Cadbury Schweppes dominate the industry with nearly 90 percent of the market controlled by these three companies.. Revenues for 1992 across the industry exceeded $45 billion, increasing to $50 billion in 1993 and $57 billion in 1994. Coca-Cola and PepsiCo are American companies and are traded on the New York Stock Exchange; Cadbury Schweppes is located in England but has ADR shares traded on the NASDAQ system in the United States."
| |
|
U.S. and Thailand, 1994.
This paper compares the United States with Thailand, a country from the Third-World. Government, economics, trade, politics, welfare, education and children.
2,250 words (approx. 9.0 pages), 11 sources, $ 79.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
From the Paper
"This research will compare the United States with Thailand, a country from the Third-World. Differences in government, economics, politics, and social structure will be highlighted.
The United States is a federal republic. Each of the 50 states and the District of Columbia exercises a measure of internal self-government. Defense, foreign affairs, coinage, posts, the higher levels of justice, and internal security are the responsibility of the federal government.. The President is head of the executive and is elected for a four-year term by a college of representatives elected directly from each state. The President appoints the other members of the executive, subject to the consent of the Senate. The Congress is the legislative body and consists of 100 members of the Senate and 435 members of the House of Representatives. Two senators are chosen by direct .... "
|
| Term Paper # 55213 |
temporarily unavailable
|
|
|
|
